Close



Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 112
  1. #26

    Default

    One this I didn't really see mentioned is ethonal contend is gasoline or how it effects it. Lets just say I don't run higher octane ans I usually leave my timing between 16-18°.
    2 1986 cougars (both 4 eyed and 5.0)
    1 1987 cougar

  2. #27

    Default

    From here:

    https://mnbiofuels.org/media-mba/blo...-for-beginners

    "In terms of its octane rating, ethanol has a rating of 113. As mentioned above, fuels with a higher octane rating reduce engine knocking and perform better. Also, almost all gasoline in the US contains 10 percent ethanol. When you mix 10 percent 113 octane ethanol with 85 octane gasoline it increases the octane two points to the normal 87 octane most consumers use. So the higher the ethanol content, the higher the octane. The octane rating for E15 (15% ethanol) is 88 octane and E85 (85% ethanol) is 108 octane."

    Since alcohol has a lower energy density than gasoline and requires a different amount of oxygen to achieve complete combustion, you should only add as little as needed to get the octane rating that you need.
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  3. #28

    Default

    Jack, what about how the o2 sensor reads it too? Isnt the Delta different? I thought that was some of the reason people find nonethanol gas works better in really old efis like my 84. I haven't tried using it yet however...
    1984.5 G.T.350 5.0 CFI AOD Convertible (TRX package, loaded)
    K&N filter in a stock dual snorkel, GT40 heads, Edelbrock 3721 intake, MSD 8456 Dist., MSD 8227 coil
    Comp cams XE254H, hypereutectic pistons
    Hooker Super Comp Shorty Equal Length Headers, catted BBK H-pipe, full custom duals
    Maximum Motorsports caster/camber plates and strut tower brace, 3.73 rear, dura grip (both Yukon)
    Ford Performance Springs, Firehawk A/S 225/55r16 on LMR TRX r390 wheels (street)
    Federal 595 rs-rr 245/40r17 and 255/40r17 on OE cobra r wheels (race)
    AOD rebuilt with a 6 clutch direct drum, Koline steels stacked with 8 clutches, Kevlar band, superior shift kit, new torque converter. --Everything else stock and fully functional.

  4. #29
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    If you run some % ethanol in an EFI system designed only for gas, you are creating a lean condition.

    In order to get to a healthy A/F on E85 you need 35% more fuel,

    Now, liquid does not compress so your cylinder pressure will increase. You have around 102-105 octane which will allow more ignition advance. Studies show around 10-12% more power.

    But if you do not address the added fuel requirement of the alcohol introduced into as an E10 or E15 you will have a lean condition. It will impact at WOT open loop operation because the O2’s are not paid attention to at WOT - it’s all fuel / timing map in the tune.

  5. #30

    Default

    E85 kicks ass...if your fuel system can deliver what is needed. The charge temp is so low, you can crank in tons of timing and the torque and power production is excellent. As noted, you'll need a lot more fuel to make it work, I typically would also run a non-converted AFR in the 7:1 range for best power. It is hard on part though. aluminum reacts poorly with it, as do any rubber parts.

  6. #31
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Onset of detonation creats the same results





    The picture Jack H linked is the key. The 4500 to 5000 Hz zone is the onset of incipent knock, on our Windsors with 4 inch bore, its 5200 Hz when its full noise.

    Engines vary that tone depending on bore size and combustion chamber type.

    On the Windsor 221-255-260-289-302-342 family, the onset is delicate and easily detected. It has a not very efficient burn, but its easy to control.

    On the 335 engines,due to bore size and chamber type, it gives no leeway at all. Cleveland and Lima Big Block 385 Polyspheric heads are very efficient chambers, but very hard to control knock. The old FE was a reasonably stable advancer too.

    The Hemi is the least efficient, but has the best knock detonation.
    The Lima twin wedge 2000/2300/2500, the worst.
    The 5.0 OHV is a sweet engine to play around with the total advance and initial.

    Chrysler and Ford backed out of some of its Hemi and poloyspheric engines because of how senstive some chambers were to advance. There was also a cost issue, with both Ford and Chrysler having too many engine variations by 1970. The Elephant 426 Hemi and the Cleveland and M's were culled out due to cost and sales.

    A simple knock sensor mount was drilled into early 1981 on wards 302 and 351 Windsor engines blocks for a Piezo-electric knock sensor. Only few Duraspark III brown box cars with the EECII or III got it, I think the Variable Venturi 351M and some of the Std Performance and HO 351 G codes for Panther Cop squad cars.

    Ford had this technology well in hand, but it wasn't needed as the electronics's industry (Motorolla, Intel etc..) got the 5.0 and all the bank fire 5.0/5.8 truck engines well sorted with EECIV.

    If you wanna push the envelope, you have to looking into measuring the knock you cannot hear. If you have spent time on the Howitzer range or listen to Hard Rock like IO do, you miss the key 4500 to 5000 Hz knock which is audible for some, but not all.

    For Australian versions of the 5.0, they experimented with factory alloy heads and higher compression ratios, but there is a limit to how far you can push it on oxygenated blends because it leans off the 14.7:1 "stoich" reading to 15.2:1 or more.


    Knock resistance happens when you reduce the dynamic compression ratio and fiddle with the air fuel and advance. Three things.

    The LS engines measure or at least, have the ignition ramp and air fuel ratio dynamically tailored to suit the normally alloy head and sometimes blocked so called Gen III's.

    Ford was going to do this, but instead customized the TFi unit, and then went EDIS8 for 97-01.

    The factory 5.0 HO TFI unit is mapped to suit the peak advance needs. There are various versions you can source, not all the same. There are custom variants. Base idle can move the total advance out of whack into a danger zone with 87 octane and even a 9.1:1 static compression ratio. Aluminum heads help gain more leeway until detonation sets in, it expands the graph above, but it only gives a 0.5 to 0.75 point compression gain unless you fiddle with air fuel ratios. The real breakthrough was means testing measured knock form the most effected cylinders.

    All this was worked through internally at Fords EEE development stages. There is advantages in pure knock sensors if your block serial number pad has the tap hole for the Ford Knock sensor. Its a great tale tail, and is almost 100% effective.



    see https://fordsix.com/viewtopic.php?t=78760


    All EECIV pinouts varied, but you can use the stock factory Pin 23 truck wiring as a way to get a knock sensor tell tale working. Then you can manually retard as per the SPOUT protocol.

    see
    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    LOL. 0 Post#686 7-03-2015, 01:01 AM all over...



    See http://www.fordmods.com/documents.php?d=43

    The common E6RF 12A69BA sensor is the orange inserted item in one of XFlow_Fairlane's post #6

    All later EECIV EFI's had Pin 23 hooked up to the Knock Sensor (Unleaded Only)

    https://fordsix.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=54364





    You just need to come down on total advance.

    All X-flow Canted valve heads have 302 Boss/ 351 Boss closed chamber properties, so there is poor gas flow incomming, and excessive quench. Ford Australia started with Leaded 97 octane the heighest lead value in the world untill 1986. Then they dropped the compression ratio from 9.35:1 to 8.6 or 8.8:1, and added 1986 E6 Mustang style high swirl ramps and EECIV TFI spark reduction stratergy. That allowed 91 octance to give the same power as 97 leaded.


    So you have to do the same, and quell detonation by tipping in advance retard under boost. High static advance, then no more than 23 total, and maybee even less than 16 under boost.


    The front head stud takes a knock sensor on X flow Fords. ARP stud kits aren't drilled for the battery earth which also fits the KS.

    Early log head Falcons had a front US passenger side thread drilled into the head bolt.

    The bolt is basically the Cleveland type, 7/8"taller than the old 200/250 non cross flow logger. It has a screw in thread, and a Piezo electric knock sensor was used to trim the spark advance.

    You can use it to peal back advance under load.


    Don't be afraid of knocking back advance...low advance tolerance and a lack of incipient knock is proof of efficient combustion. That's what all box code WA1 EECIV ecu's have, essentially 1987-1997 4.9 F150 and 1980-1991 5.8 G code VV7200 P71 knock sensor logic.


    Its the whole reason why Ford Special Vehicles killed most of the 1970 to 1978 Cleveland race engines, and why dumb a$$e$ who put earlier Durasparks on TFI EECIV 4.1s ended up taking them out....


    Oh yeah, now I remember..

    https://fordsix.com/viewtopic.php?t=59435



    Since its a Honda head, it needs Larry Widmer Honda logic.

    He uses the GM'S 1986-1996 1997562,10456017,10456287 (Tomco 29014) knock sensor on his 480 hp VTECH engines









    Lastly, Copper head gaskets require indxed spark plugs, since the engine requires very critical set up.

  7. #32
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    knock sensor, Ford were all over it.

    Passenger side back of the block. By the engine number stamping plate

    eg 1987 Ford F150 5.0





    G vin 351w's 1981-1985
    Some of the feedback carb E van and F trucks
    1989 onwards Bank Fire truck (4.9's, 5.0's, 5.8s)

    https://www.fullsizebronco.com/threa...sb-302.231234/



    E3AF-12A699AA 29021
    E3AZ-12A699A 29021
    E3ZZ-12A699A 29022
    E7TF-12A699A2A 29042
    E7TZ-12A699A 29042
    E6TF-12A699A 29043
    E6TZ-12A699A 29043
    E67F-12A699AA 29043
    E5TF-12A699AA 29045
    E5TZ-12A699A 29045
    E6RZ-12A699AA 29046


    29021 FORD, MERC 81-91, F TRK 86-96 .................................................. .................................................. ........... 9
    29022 FORD 83-93, F TRK 85-89, MERC 83-89 .................................................. .................................................. 13
    29042 F TRK 87-90 .................................................. .................................................. ............................................... 13
    29043 F TRK 86-87, 90-96 .................................................. .................................................. ................................... 13
    29044 F TRK 83-85 .................................................. .................................................. ............................................... 13
    29045 F TRK 85-86 .................................................. .................................................. ............................................... 13
    29046 FORD, MERC 97-99 .................................................. .................................................. .................................. 14
    29047 F TRK 97-99, LINC 98-99 .................................................. .................................................. .......................... 15
    29048 FORD, MERC 96-99 .................................................. .................................................. .................................. 14
    29049 FORD 96-98, F TRK 93-98, LINC 95-99 .................................................. .................................................. ... 14
    29050 F TRK, MERC TRK 97-98 .................................................. .................................................. ......................... 16
    29051 FORD 93-97 .................................................. .................................................. ............................................... 17
    29052 F TRK 97-98 .................................................. .................................................. ............................................... 18
    29053 FORD 89-92 .................................................. .................................................. ................................................ 19

    http://www.tomco-inc.com/Catalog/knock%20sensors.pdf

  8. #33
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    The great goal is power without detonation that destroys your engine. A full MegaSquirt system will do that.

    The EECIV will too. An AE1A with a partial harness from the F250 and the chopped up harness form a 94 Mustang.

    Or a Mapped T4M0-CBAZA-W4H0 Tuner Pro from SailorBob.

    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...ri-Turbo-Build


    Moving back a step to 100% Cobra 93 calibration.

    Most of the issues with getting close the the best is that Ford eliminated the crank position sensor and the Knock sensor due to cost and Complication at that came from the HO SEFI's greatly increased intake duration. The sweet zone for triggering a knock sensor is The 5200 Hz target which has has a 200 Hz either side threshold of detection, 5000 to 5400 Hz was the factory target.

    You can use the old EECIII crank trigger from a CFi 5.0 Standard Performance from 1980 to 1984; it sorts out some of the signal problems. Heck if its good enough for Keith Dorton's 650 hp 9600 rpm Chevy V6, its good enough for a Fraud. Then use the factory knock sensor and run the code from a partially bank fire Truck computer.

    Ford dlet with the issues that Nissan failed to in the RB 25/26 Skylines. On the test circuit, Ford had major problems with the Dual Synch TFi system and knock sensor at that higher out put level , so they cut it out of the 5.0 HO Port EFi, but left it in the Bank Fire Dual Throttle body trucks.

    Ford had to remove the Knock Sensor function from the Mustang EEC-IV Processors due to mis-triggering from the Timing chain with the HO spec cam. Same issue with the Nissan. Ford decided to simply eliminate the crank trigger on all EECIV's because it made the EFi system "much more" simple.

    The Knock senor is present in the Bank fire 5.0 and 5.8 dual throttle body EFi trucks.

    On the HO EFi port sequential, all the junk DNA is still there in the A9L Strategies, but it is "De-populated" with zero values. The Knock sensor related tables are populated but they are delimited so that the Knock Sensor input is Ignored.

    Ford was smart with the EECIV and TFi...they are not embedded systems totally, so you can make and break them, even EDIS8 can be added. There is huge scope.

    You can run the spark control externally via an MSD 6AL2, and make a totally custom curve with stunning results, while keeping EECIV functional.

    The MSD Ignition 8964 Knock Sensor alert is a tell tale that doesn't control knock like the truck EFi does, but its handy enough to use.




    See http://www.jegs.com/installationinst...1/121-8964.pdf


    Most MSD stuff works, but it has some limits. In terms of reliability, its the same as TFi. If its not thrashed, and it has good wiring and clear singal's to and from, it'll work for a long time.

    Warranty problems are just normal electronic issues, and can be taken care of. All that May Stop Dead hogwash is when signal is lost, which happens with stock parts of the TFi if they are not the right ones.

  9. #34

    Default

    You can add a factory knock sensor to a factory A9L series EECIV, but you must add in a PCB for the bandpass filter for the knock sensor. I think this is where Ford really screwed up in the Truck EECs. The bandpass filter was passive and far too crude. You need to use an active filter so you can get some high slopes to reject out of band signals.

    You can also purchase a wide band knock sensor with a programmable bandpass filter. This makes it much easier to tune the knock sensor to your engine. The resonant frequency in the cylinder is based on the cylinder bore dimension and the speed of sound. However, the speed of sound varies with gas density, so boosted applications require different filter frequencies to really work correctly.
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  10. #35
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    The filters are a low and high pass, and its standard electronics. Ford elected to remove some parts from the contract to Motorola for the chip and PCB architecture is limited. This was found out during the 1985 EECIV F1 work with Benetton's Cosworth 850 Hp Turbo V6. The head Ford EECIV electronic engineer on the F1 Video noted that Filtering for Power Spectral Density was an easy thing to do, but that it was elective at the design phase. A case of stand in line and take a number, scoping the knock sensor was downgraded because means testing it wasn't as effective as administering it so knock didn't happen.


    Quote Originally Posted by midwestbird
    The Haynes manual states the voltage should be 5V, but I am consistently measuring half that @ 2.5V. I'm surprised how little information I was able to find online about my situation, but I am wondering if someone has a suggestion. My PCM (an EEC-IV) is a newly re-manufactured unit I installed about a month ago - I did not check OBD1 codes prior to replacing the EEC-IV so I don't know if the 25 code existed with the old PCM. The hard start existed even with the old PCM though.

    I have not installed the new KS yet, I'd like to address the unexpected ref voltage first -- my old KS might not even need to be replaced.


    Haynes is often wrong, as it is in this case.





    :beer: Its running fine. :thumbup:


    Pin 23 is normally the EECIV Knock Sensor for Unleaded engine, so if its reading 2.5V, then its near enough to the required +3V for engine Engine Running


    Depending on pinouts for your EECIV, it reads between 2.5 v to 3v normally if no knock is present.

    They are super simple, as soon as there is knock in the frequency of 5600 or so cycles per second , it zeros voltage.

    There is a conditioning for each sensor, but if its for a 4" bore 300 4.9 Ford or a 5.0 or 5.8 Ford Truck, it'll have its low and high pass set to between 4800 and 6400 Herts, to suit engine knock in the zone a 4 inch bore engine makes. Its not really something anyone needs to over think.


    The frequency footprint just has to match, then, whammo, it cuts voltage, which cuts trimming to the TFI module.

    When the cycles per second match, it stops the base voltage to Pin 23. Computer cuts trimming to the engine, normally right back to 10 degrees on the TFI, or about 20 total.

    Here is a visual example. Knock is a high frequency event which has fast cycles.





    https://fordsix.com/viewtopic.php?t=59435
    Quote Originally Posted by redxm

    https://fordsix.com/viewtopic.php?t=73416

    Quote Originally Posted by bubba22349
    Here are a few part numbers for the Knock Sensors that might help you in your search. I don't know what thread size though. I don't think using a GM sensor is a good idea if you are using a stock Ford ECU, but it might work if you are using a Mega Squirt. Also some times you can get an error code because of dirty connections or a broken wire and the sensor would still be good. Good luck :nod:

    1990-1987 4.9 (Y) 300 Bronco, E, F, Series Ford numbers E7TF-12A699A2A, E7TF-A, F0TZ-1 Tomco # 29047
    1989-1987 4.9 (Y) 300 Bronco, E, F, Series Ford number EZZ-12A699A Tomco # 29047
    NAPA Echlin listed for a 1988 F150 4.9 PN ECH DKS205

    The aftermarket sensors listed are used on many other Ford Engines sizes too.

    How it works? It counts frequency, and cuts voltage if the frequency is 5640 hertz. For a 4 " cylinder bore, that is incipient knock. On a 200 or 250, its about 6100 hertz.

    That's cycles per second.

    Down here in the Antipods, we are stuck between a mixture of the old European ignition retard systems, and the later Link ECU system controls, which are for Japanese turbos. Ford Turbo Falcons and Supercharged or turbo Holden's with GM engines, there is normally a re-flash, so they use the stock stuff.

    Most guys are using a Jaycar KC5444 knock sensor by John Clarke.

    It has a PSD= Power Spectural Density determination


    ks_calibration_006.jpg


    ks_calibration_007.jpg


    Early knock sensors...well, all the same really, a knock sensor is a knock sensor, although the GM ones are more sensitive.

    Later, the normal Ford 3 volt signal polling rate with a change to less than 3 volts being the discriminator has changed to the AFM type amp draw algorithm.

    Just an Analogue Digital "Do If True" ignition peal back.

    Like the very bad 4.9 1-bbl feedback F150 truck system that screwed over so many shade trees who couldn't be frigged pullin' the codes.

    For the earlier resonant type, they are tuned to a particular engine’s knock frequency of interest.

    Later KS's have a Power Spectral Density determination, with a sampling cut off to sense the deep seated knock. Jaycar's does it that way, and so does GM now. Ford does it on all sensors, but it took time to add the facility to the versions of the EECIV, and the Dual Synch distributor was always a problem because it isn't as stable as the EECIII CPS on the 5.0 Standard Output., or the later Explorer EDSI8 97-01 CPS.

    The combustion shock wave excites a characteristic frequency in the engine, which is typically in the 5000Hz–7000Hz range. Cylinder bore diameter and combustion chamber temperature are the main variables that affect this fundamental frequency. Variations in the fundamental frequency for a given engine configuration can be as much as ± 400 Hz in terms of combustion chamber design.

    In terms of bore, the knock frequency can be greatly influenced.
    Approximated using :

    900/(Pi * r) where r = the radius of the bore in Sillymeters, um, millimeters.

    Given a bore of 76 mm the knock frequency will be 7540 Hz.
    A bore of 3.7" or 93.98 mm, the knock frequency will be 6100 Hz
    A fat bore Chevy or Ford with 4" bore, its down to 5600 Hz, with the very smooth combustion of a wedge head dragging its audibility down to a 5200 Hz threashold

    Larger diameters and/or lower temperatures result in a lower fundamental frequency. Signals received by a remote sensor contain additional vibrational modes, which are structural resonances in the engine excited by the shock wave as it hits the cylinder wall. Typically, two to four additional frequency peaks are evident between the fundamental frequency and 20000 Hz. (PSD= Power Spectural Density determination)

    Engine structure can have different higher vibrational modes. Sensor mounting location can affect which modes are detectable and the amplitude of each with respect to the background mechanical noise.

    The later sensor’s all follow the Siemens or Bosch resonant frequency is above 20kHz with a wide pass-band to give a relatively flat response over a frequency range between 3kHz and 15kHz. This allows this sensor to monitor either the fundamental knock frequency or 1st harmonic for most engines.

    The pinouts and use of MegaJolts EDIS6 or EDIS8 means its a straight down the line FoMoCo. Three extra lines of code, and you can run EDIS on a pre EECV computer. Just like the SC3800 Thunderbird.

    On the stock Aussie EECIV for 1986-1992 Port EFi X flows, Ford Australia just copied the USA protocols. If knock occurs, the base 3 volt signal is pulled low.


    xf_250_efi_pinouts_001.jpg


    "Do if true" ignition timing reduction if knock is present. How it does it is just switch related.

    "Cut me a switch, bouy"

  11. #36

    Default

    What do you mean by a "full Megasquirt system"? Also, I don't know what a PCB is either. Are you guys actually suggesting I add a knock sensor or is this a tangent?

    The way I'm leaning with my ECM choice now is the MS2 PnP. Should I mess with the timing now before I get it, or would that be a waste of time because the MS will handle timing and advance differently?

    Also, I believe I'll be able to find non-ox fuel, so that's what I will probably try and stick with from here on out.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  12. #37

    Default

    Brad,

    PCB = Printed Circuit Board

    It means a fiberglass board with conductive paths printed on it and electronic components to form complex circuits.

    I'm not suggesting that you add a knock sensor.

    Give your level of knowledge about spark advance, I think it would be a disaster for you to install any aftermarket EFI system on your car. All EFI systems requires a very good knowledge of fundamental engine operation. If you don't have that, you are going to end up damaging the engine or at best end up with an engine which runs worse than it did with the stock EFI.
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  13. #38
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    Don’t mean to hijack the thread in any way..... but getting to a functioning knock system with an A9L or an X3Z ECU would be very interesting.

    Selfishly ..... Everything I do on my Dart 353 build for my 86 will be done via a custom tune with BE and a Moats Quarterhorse or done with an aftermarket ECU. It’s TBD right now. I already have a set of EV6 47lb injectors and both mentioned ECUs and the quarterhorse so that’s likely where I’ll start.

    Looking at porting a FMS tubular intake to around 320 CFM per runner then go with an AFR 195 head to yield 10.5:1 and run an Ed Curtis designed cam.

    Going to need around an 80MM MAF to get to the potential of the motor. throttlebody I haven’t studied yet but will.....

    would be nice to be able to run it on a strict diet of E85 but we’ll see where I land with that.


    Going in with the thought of do it right or do it twice.
    -- James

    Favorite thing I’ve said that’s been requoted: “"40 year old beercan on wheels with too much motor"

    My four eyed foxes:
    "Trigger" - 86 Mustang GT - Black with red interior. 5.0 T5 built as Z. Original motor ~1/2 million miles. 18 yr daily, 10 a toy
    "Silver" - 85 Mustang Saleen 1985-006? (Lol) Rare 1E silver GT / charcoal interior. The car is a little bit of a mystery. Current project bought as a roller, tons of Saleen / Racecraft pedigree

    Also in the stable - my son’s car. 1986 Mustang GT Convertible. Black/Black/Black conversion. 93 leather. VM1 ECU. T5Z

    past foxes -
    1989 Mustang LX Sport 5.0 AOD white/tan black top. Once I ran this one down I caught a wife.
    Wife also had a 1987 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe in the 90's.

    I'm a four eyed pride supporter, are you? Become one today!
    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/payments.php

  14. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hidley View Post
    Brad,

    PCB = Printed Circuit Board

    It means a fiberglass board with conductive paths printed on it and electronic components to form complex circuits.

    I'm not suggesting that you add a knock sensor.

    Give your level of knowledge about spark advance, I think it would be a disaster for you to install any aftermarket EFI system on your car. All EFI systems requires a very good knowledge of fundamental engine operation. If you don't have that, you are going to end up damaging the engine or at best end up with an engine which runs worse than it did with the stock EFI.
    You're probably going to laugh, but what I'm TRYING to do by doing this is, simplify things. The idea that I'm getting from people about the MS is that it eliminates many of the things that confuse the factory ECU. At this point, I just want the engine to run well and be happy with the parts that are there. That is goal #1. I'm not doing this because I want to be in there tweaking things all the time. FAR from it. I want the opposite of that!! It's just that the idea I'm getting about the original EEC is that it won't run as well as it can if you have parts it doesn't recognize. I do MOSTLY have '93 Cobra spec stuff, which is why I originally chose the X3Z, but the cam is different, and the rockers are 1.6, not 1.7. I had always been thinking I would need to have it dyno-tuned and chipped. But now, I'm realizing that by the time you do that, you're in it for Megasquirt money. Especially considering what you have to pay (what I did pay) for that factory ECU since no one is remanufacturing them anymore. Simple supply and demand. Demand is up supply is down.

    Anyway, just because I don't intend to change things any further at this point, I still don't want to paint myself into a corner as far as the future goes. It just seemed to me like I would have an easier time getting help with an MS than I would a chipped/tuned EEC.

    I do have a fair knowledge of how an engine works (I have an ASSET degree, if you can believe that, although it was 20 years ago with very little practical experience), it's just stuff like cam specs, adjusting your cam timing, drilling oil passages, you know, that kind of voodoo, squeeze every pony out of what you already have, racer tricks that I never got into. Hence my limited knowledge on spark advance. I know why you advance a spark and all that stuff, I just don't have the practical experience for how it affects your performance in the real world. I would've made a better teacher than mechanic. I'm one of those.

    The goal of this thread for me was to find out what effect my increased compression will have, whether I'm doing right by running higher octane, and how to set the timing so that the car won't blow up. Not to "get the most out of" anything. Again, it's a lack of practical experience.

    I liked the idea of the MS vs the EEC because it has an interface that is leaps and bounds easier to use (maybe i could make a change if I had to), I would have less trouble finding people who know how to adjust them properly (they can even be adjusted/tuned online), It's far less sensitive to little things that leave your EEC idle a complete mess, is expandable and adjustable for future changes even if I don't intend to make any. I just don't have the practical experience to say I'll be satisfied with the chipped/tuned EEC. If I'm not, then what? Probably go to all the trouble of spending a bunch of money to bring it to a guy and have it dyno-tuned again. How many times? How many is enough? I don't know. I've asked all over, but am getting very little feedback on it. I feel like I'm less likely to be dissatisfied with an MS tune because it's the preferred platform among tuners now, tons of people are messing with them, their being less sensitive to piddly things that upset EECs, and you can always go back to your last save if you screw something up too badly.

    What do you think?
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  15. #40
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hidley View Post
    Brad,

    PCB = Printed Circuit Board

    It means a fiberglass board with conductive paths printed on it and electronic components to form complex circuits.

    I'm not suggesting that you add a knock sensor.

    Give your level of knowledge about spark advance, I think it would be a disaster for you to install any aftermarket EFI system on your car. All EFI systems requires a very good knowledge of fundamental engine operation. If you don't have that, you are going to end up damaging the engine or at best end up with an engine which runs worse than it did with the stock EFI.

    The best option is stock box code EECIVs. MegaSquirt variants and the plug and play systems that use the stock 60 pin plugs eliminate a lot of stuff and make tuning a breeze. The issue is where does it stop. Feature creep, and since youve got this, you can also run nitrous, a turbo, aluminum heads etc.

    On an engine core that is purchased with a warranty or an expectation of durability, you want to keep it close to the stock Five Tier engine outputs, and use Fords perspription.

    Going aftermarket is like buying drugs...you never ever stop, and an engine ends up like a guy on death row...I didnt mean to go so far...honest!

    I love aftermarket MS stuff, but the 210-215-225/248/268/295/335 hp factory EECIV and 103 pin EECV calibration for 5.0s and 5.6s are really easy to track and trace...there is good knowledge base. And the AIR, TFi , EGR schematic and knock sensor changes and the lack of 100% open loop air fuel mixture control is made up for by Americans and Australians who still make upgrades for the common box codes. Its never going to do you any wrong.

  16. #41
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Ignition is very difficult. Fords TFi verses EDIS8...its an easy change to add upgrades. Knock sensor, just add a tell tale MSD sensor.

    Im not saying Ford or MegaSquirt or plug and play us any less or more simple. Undestanding what you have decided to use is much more important that chopping and changing. You've got backup nomatter what you do Brad.


    Your car, your choice. Id stay Cobra EECIV, but a lot of 5.0s are MegaSquirted now.

  17. #42

    Default

    Brad,

    I know five people that have installed MS on their cars. One of them has a running engine. The other four gave up on it.

    I totally agree that the user interface is much nicer and easier to understand than what you have with the stock EECIV tuning software which is available. However, with MS you are really starting from scratch. Ford has put thousands of hours of tuning into the EEC which you have. The changes that have been made to your engine are not going to require that much changing. There is zero reason to take the car to tuner with a dyno.

    The vast majority of the things that you need to fix will all be done under part throttle conditions. These can all be done on the street with data logging. There much harder to do/impossible on most dynos. A dyno is needed when all you are trying to do is to get maximum power from an engine. In any case, even if that is your ultimate goal, that is the final step in tuning. All of the part throttle tuning needs to be done first.

    You will need a wide band O2 sensor, a copy of BE and EA software, and a programmable chip such as a Moates.

    Idle control problems are usually the result of low airflow mixture problems. These are the results of someone using an aftermarket MAF or changing the plumbing with a stock MAF. Don't do this. You could easily make 500hp with the 70mm MAF that you have. Use a stock airbox with a STOCK air filter. Don't remove the wire screen in the MAF. Keep the MAF clocked at the stock angle. This will all result in accurate airflow readings, so the engine won't surge.

    If you have nonstock fuel injectors, you will need to reprogram the injector parameters in the EEC. This isn't typing in one number and you are done. Injectors are nonlinear devices, so you have to put in several parameters to tell the EEC how they are nonlinear. You can determine these parameters from data logs with a wideband O2 sensor output. ANY EFI system you use will need these parameters programmed into it or it is going to have less than optimal mixture control and drivability. If you know what injectors you have, you can usually find fairly accurate data for them to start with.

    Assuming that the MAF is properly calibrated in the EEC (which it is) and the injector parameters are properly entered into the EEC, changes in airflow from larger cams, heads, etc only need very minor tuning. The engine has already measured the amount of air coming into it with the MAF. It will automatically inject the correct amount of fuel. If you have a higher compression ratio, you will need to change some of the spark tables, but the basic shape of them will be correct.

    EECTuning.org has lots of information on this.
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  18. #43

    Default

    (EDIT: TYPED BEFORE I SAW YOUR POST, JACK)


    Yeah, future creep is the last thing I want too. It originally was a big reason behind going with the X3Z in the first place. It is static, and would be more trouble to make a change to in response to some other change I would make such as a performance mod. But then I started to learn more about what it will cost to have it chipped & tuned. Then I started to wonder if having it tuned once would even be enough. Having an old 5.0L that's never run that well all these years has lead me to wonder if it will ever just be a good running car that does everything the way it's supposed to, idle nicely, rev all the way to the redline without pinging, etc). You guys know. Trying to get these things to idle nicely is a nightmare, especially if they're old.

    Years later, I find myself with a mostly new engine. I never got the chance to run it a lot at the end of last season because I was chasing down "new install" gremlins. I mostly got them sorted, but still can't just go out there and fire it up. It's making a ticking noise I'm waiting for my builder friend to come and look at which i didn't see a point to doing that until the weather warms up. I think it's just the rockers needing readjusting. But the point I guess is that I don't really know if it runs well on the unmolested Cobra computer.

    What the winter does do though is give me the chance to step back and sort of reboot my perspective on the car. Last year when I was talking about which way I should go with my computer, several people were all like "just megasquirt it! They work so well!", but I sort of stubbornly stuck to my plan with the Cobra computer because of how expensive it was to buy and all the trouble I had piecing together the right MAF and housing. One of those "after all that trouble, i'm not changing course now!" kind of things.

    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...EFI-EEC-IV-SCT

    But now I'm looking at how much all that costs vs. whether I'll be happy with the result. Everyone gushes over the Megasquirt. When I ask people about a chipped EEC, I get mostly crickets, like no one knows. I've never been around a big group of car dudes that all have five-ohs with various different mods to them and car shops around every corner. This ain't Los Angeles, it's Minneapolis. Back in the '90s, I counted myself lucky to be driving a Mustang at all, a '79 with the 6, let alone one with a V8. I've just never been part of a "scene" like that so that's why I don't have much practical experience.

    And to be clear, with the MS, I wouldn't be starting from scratch, right? They give you a base tune to start with, and then you just fill in a few more parameters to get started... All I'd want to do with stuff like timing is, get the mechanical part of it right, and then if I left it alone from that point, would it be that bad? Maybe leave it up to someone else to tweak if ABSOLUTELY necessary? I wasn't thinking changes would even need to be made to that. Doesn't it run timing on the base tune the same as normal EEC? I guess I wouldn't know though.
    Last edited by ZephyrEFI; 03-02-2020 at 07:10 PM.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  19. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hidley View Post
    Brad,

    I know five people that have installed MS on their cars. One of them has a running engine. The other four gave up on it.

    I totally agree that the user interface is much nicer and easier to understand than what you have with the stock EECIV tuning software which is available. However, with MS you are really starting from scratch. Ford has put thousands of hours of tuning into the EEC which you have. The changes that have been made to your engine are not going to require that much changing. There is zero reason to take the car to tuner with a dyno.

    The vast majority of the things that you need to fix will all be done under part throttle conditions. These can all be done on the street with data logging. There much harder to do/impossible on most dynos. A dyno is needed when all you are trying to do is to get maximum power from an engine. In any case, even if that is your ultimate goal, that is the final step in tuning. All of the part throttle tuning needs to be done first.

    You will need a wide band O2 sensor, a copy of BE and EA software, and a programmable chip such as a Moates.

    Idle control problems are usually the result of low airflow mixture problems. These are the results of someone using an aftermarket MAF or changing the plumbing with a stock MAF. Don't do this. You could easily make 500hp with the 70mm MAF that you have. Use a stock airbox with a STOCK air filter. Don't remove the wire screen in the MAF. Keep the MAF clocked at the stock angle. This will all result in accurate airflow readings, so the engine won't surge.

    If you have nonstock fuel injectors, you will need to reprogram the injector parameters in the EEC. This isn't typing in one number and you are done. Injectors are nonlinear devices, so you have to put in several parameters to tell the EEC how they are nonlinear. You can determine these parameters from data logs with a wideband O2 sensor output. ANY EFI system you use will need these parameters programmed into it or it is going to have less than optimal mixture control and drivability. If you know what injectors you have, you can usually find fairly accurate data for them to start with.

    Assuming that the MAF is properly calibrated in the EEC (which it is) and the injector parameters are properly entered into the EEC, changes in airflow from larger cams, heads, etc only need very minor tuning. The engine has already measured the amount of air coming into it with the MAF. It will automatically inject the correct amount of fuel. If you have a higher compression ratio, you will need to change some of the spark tables, but the basic shape of them will be correct.

    EECTuning.org has lots of information on this.
    Wow, you make a lot of sense, here.

    I suppose I need to consider that most guys on car forums are building racecars and stuff, so it doesn't matter to them that their car never runs. That's not what my car will be for.

    My injectors are factory Ford 24# ones, like the Cobra computer should expect. Ditto the MAF. Just what the computer wants.

    Thanks for your input so far!
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  20. #45

    Default

    Brad,

    One of the main problems people have with these engines is this.

    One of the three fundamental inputs to the EEC to make the engine run correctly is the amount of air coming into it. When you change things about the airpath or the MAF itself, the MAF is no longer accurately telling the EEC how much air is coming into the engine. This has more affects than just the EEC injecting the wrong amount of fuel. It also affects the spark timing, because it affects the calculated engine load. It affects the position of IAC, so this makes the engine idle worse.

    As long as the MAF isn't telling the EEC the correct amount of air which is entering the engine, no amount of adjusting any other parameters can make the engine run properly. You can probably make it run ok, under some combination of load and rpm, but that is it.
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  21. #46
    FEP Super Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Roseburg Oregon
    Posts
    3,308

    Default

    I hand built my mega squirt from the kit , installed it on a bone stock engine 5.0 with 5 speed manual in a mustang.
    The customer support was just fine , plenty of help to get a base starting tune . Simple , no , horribly difficult, no .
    Those that don't finish , ....well i will leave it there .
    clowns to the left of me , Jokers to the right

  22. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hidley View Post
    The vast majority of the things that you need to fix will all be done under part throttle conditions. These can all be done on the street with data logging. There much harder to do/impossible on most dynos. A dyno is needed when all you are trying to do is to get maximum power from an engine. In any case, even if that is your ultimate goal, that is the final step in tuning. All of the part throttle tuning needs to be done first.
    I've been thinking some more. This point here is really key. I guess I'd been hoping that tuning it on a dyno would allow the tuner to simulate driving conditions and get the ECU ready for whatever it might encounter in the real world. A shortcut to spending weeks driving around, looking at numbers, and tweaking them, if you will. So really, tuning on a dyno is not really good for much other than bragging rights?!

    When I started this process, I didn't even really know what questions I should be asking. It's sounding more like starting with a MS, I would NOT have a mostly usable car that I can still use mostly to get me places and have some fun with while tweaking things here and there? I'd gotten that idea from stuff like this video from BREW2L.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqas4Me7HXM

    From what I see there, it looks like you plug it in, put in a few parameters, and you've got a car you can go out and drive. Apparently that's not so though, correct? I know he says there's more you need to do, but that's a whole world I don't even know at this point. What does that look like? I have no idea. Does it involve a car I can safely go out and use if I want just not quite getting the performance it could have, or is just sitting in the garage banging my head on the dash trying to figure out what to do next? These are things I didn't know.

    What I'm getting here is that the X3Z would be the far safer, simpler method for me to end up with a car I can safely jump in and go whenever I want. A street car. Not necessarily trying to MAXIMIZE every pony for the best ET. Of course we know I am still tempted by the power gods, otherwise I wouldn't have gone with the different cam. I'd just have a simple GT40 motor I wouldn't be at all worried about.

    Quote Originally Posted by ashley roachclip View Post
    Those that don't finish , ....well i will leave it there .
    nice. Thanks for the input.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  23. #48

    Default

    I think this may be the attraction of the Holley sniper and the variants there in. Good software, tons of intake options, low cost, tunable if you want, self tuning if you like. I know the sefi is awesome looking and all that but I kinda like the dual snorkel 5.0 HO air cleaner (mine even says efi!). Works with tfi but also Holley pnp ignition and distributors are there off the shelf.

    FYI I still have my stock cfi but down the road I know I will have to buy one. Someday.
    1984.5 G.T.350 5.0 CFI AOD Convertible (TRX package, loaded)
    K&N filter in a stock dual snorkel, GT40 heads, Edelbrock 3721 intake, MSD 8456 Dist., MSD 8227 coil
    Comp cams XE254H, hypereutectic pistons
    Hooker Super Comp Shorty Equal Length Headers, catted BBK H-pipe, full custom duals
    Maximum Motorsports caster/camber plates and strut tower brace, 3.73 rear, dura grip (both Yukon)
    Ford Performance Springs, Firehawk A/S 225/55r16 on LMR TRX r390 wheels (street)
    Federal 595 rs-rr 245/40r17 and 255/40r17 on OE cobra r wheels (race)
    AOD rebuilt with a 6 clutch direct drum, Koline steels stacked with 8 clutches, Kevlar band, superior shift kit, new torque converter. --Everything else stock and fully functional.

  24. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by emerygt350 View Post
    I think this may be the attraction of the Holley sniper and the variants there in. Good software, tons of intake options, low cost, tunable if you want, self tuning if you like. I know the sefi is awesome looking and all that but I kinda like the dual snorkel 5.0 HO air cleaner (mine even says efi!). Works with tfi but also Holley pnp ignition and distributors are there off the shelf.

    FYI I still have my stock cfi but down the road I know I will have to buy one. Someday.
    Yeah, for sure. Simplicity goes a long way. I've always said if i build an older car someday, I will DEFINITELY use one of those. It would look great under a shaker.

    I guess I was expecting a level of simplicity in the Megasquirt that it doesn't actually have.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  25. #50
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    I suspect your clatter is misadjusted rocker arms. Did you do any pushrod measurements? Often critical with a new combo.

    An X3Z by itself or a Moats with your X3Z will probably give you everything you want and more most likely. It is a conservative tune compared to one like the A9L in terms of spark advance, etc. It might tolerate a little more base timing and stay out of the danger zone on pinging, etc.

    If you are running an iron head and are near 10:1 I would run 91 octane. 93 if you can find it. I would start with around 13 degrees of base advance and walk up on the right spot from there, or run with a margin of safety. It should run great there - if it doesn’t then something is wrong.

    Ive always ran my stuff at the ragged edge in terms of timing but I’ve always ran good fuel. And the first time some is in my car after they’ve told me all about how much it can’t possibly make with those E6 heads on it they get a hell ride and usually **** a brick. It’s not the quickest or the fastest 5.0L mustang out there by a long shot, but it is one of the most under estimated. My biggest beef with it has been the amount of effort I’ve had to put into moving that low end torque up in RPM. It took an intake and equal shorty headers to get that tendency to blow the tires off at low engine speeds under control. Spinning ain’t winning - it’s finally to where it pulls a 0-60 in the mid 4’s. Quicker if I’m really on the stick at the time. The kind of performance that will absolutely piss off a GT500 and has multiple times. The 07-09 with a good driver is a challenge and too close to call. A 13 should stomp my 86 but with a dude that just can’t drive ...
    Last edited by erratic50; 03-03-2020 at 10:55 PM.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •